Half of the global audience seems to support Musk's leadership at Twitter, while the other half expresses skepticism. This division in public opinion is not surprising. Some readers will resonate with this perspective, while others might react with disbelief. This pattern is typical of high-profile founder-CEOs. Elon Musk is neither the first nor the last to evoke such polarized feelings. As previously mentioned, Elon operates in his own unique way...

For those who have not been disengaged from the world for the past thirty years, it is clear that the tech industry has always been a stage for unconventional personalities. A friend of mine, Teo, often points out that to thrive in tech, one must possess a touch of eccentricity. While we won't delve into the semantics of what "eccentric" means, it is fair to say that many in the tech community are indeed a bit... unconventional.

The influential figures in technology have normalized casual attire, showing up to interviews in shorts and flip-flops, and mingling with professionals from various fields. This environment can sometimes foster a sense of overconfidence, leading to a naive belief that anything is achievable. What starts as ambition can morph into a misguided sense of entitlement to become the next tech deity.

This may sound hyperbolic, but it's not without merit. Steve Jobs cultivated a near-religious following during his tenure, a legacy that persists today. Many fans equate Apple with Jobs himself, creating a stark contrast with his successor, Tim Cook. Despite being a successful executive, Tim lacks the same charisma and unique flair that Jobs embodied. The moniker "Tim Apple" is often used, but not without its irony, as he lacks that fervent following. The movies and narratives celebrating Jobs will likely not be mirrored for Cook, illustrating the distinct personas of founder versus successor.

Similarly, Adam Neumann garnered a devoted following due to his compelling vision as a CEO, overshadowing the intricacies of his actual role. His bold ideas and charisma propelled WeWork into the spotlight, leading to a successful docudrama that has sparked discussions even among those unfamiliar with his story.

Then there’s Elizabeth Holmes, who aimed to revolutionize home healthcare. Some might argue that the arrogance often seen in tech is a male-centric issue, but I believe that anyone can fall prey to the allure of becoming a modern icon. I once supported her vision, hoping she could replicate the transformative feats achieved by figures like Steve. Her attempts to mirror Steve's style were evident.

Elon Musk is another quintessential example of this phenomenon. Despite his quirks and challenges, such as Asperger's, he has cultivated a loyal following. His involvement in Tesla and SpaceX is often more significant than the companies themselves, drawing attention to whatever projects he undertakes. His recent venture into Twitter, a platform he has famously utilized for promotion, is now becoming a new playground for his ideas. Indeed, Elon does what Elon does.

Among his bold initiatives, he wishes to reinstate Donald Trump on Twitter. While this may be contentious, it aligns with Trump's own style of leadership, reminiscent of a temperamental CEO. Both Musk and Trump share traits typical of many founder-CEOs: they are polarizing figures. High-profile leaders often find themselves at odds with established norms, and this can lead to divisive public perceptions. If I were in their shoes, I suspect I would evoke similar mixed emotions.

The urge to play the role of a godlike figure exists in many, particularly in tech, which tends to attract the most flamboyant personalities. Consider Larry Fink, the founder of BlackRock. While he has significant influence, his name rarely surfaces in mainstream conversations, contrasting sharply with the visibility of tech leaders. His discreet control over financial markets showcases a different approach, where quiet influence proves more lucrative than the spotlight.

Regardless of public opinion about Musk's acquisition of Twitter, it represents a logical progression. Like many engineers, he may embark on ventures simply because he can, urging trust based on his expertise. This mentality can often inflate one's ambitions, leading to bold but contentious decisions.

If the acquisition goes through, it could herald a new phase for Twitter and perhaps the broader social media landscape. Concerns about toxicity on platforms like Meta, Twitter, and Reddit are increasingly prevalent, and discussions about free speech versus moderation are vital. Having moderated a large online community myself, I often ponder whether fostering education around civil discourse might be more effective than strict moderation, which seems to fail in curbing personal attacks.

The current discourse environment feels chaotic, and there’s an urge to express frustration. However, addressing the root causes rather than merely the symptoms is crucial. Our educational systems often fall short, neglecting to teach essential skills for being a well-rounded, functioning member of society. Instead, we see young people drawing conclusions from superficial resources, leading to oversimplified debates.

The polarization surrounding Musk's leadership at Twitter is palpable, with some eager for his influence and others alarmed. I find myself in a complex position, recognizing that if this acquisition happens, it will likely alter Twitter’s trajectory and impact the world in significant ways, albeit in ways that may be necessary.

Founder-CEOs possess a distinct drive for disruption, and society seems to have an innate fascination with their personas. This dynamic ensures that voices will always emerge asserting the need for a strong leader to redirect a company's vision, as subdued leadership in tech rarely garners attention.

The next major shift in the tech landscape may well be the unraveling of the mythos surrounding its leading figures. Stay tuned...